Awww, I wanna be a minion! --Corgi 08:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Since there's been some discussion of how characters qualify for this category (Talk:Dimitri Vapnoople), and this category overlaps with others, do we want to keep this one? How necessary is it? --mnenyver 18:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- I see no harm in keeping it, and some advantages; there are advantages to having lots of categories with subtle differences, as long as they're not entirely redundant. There's a difference between a Wulfenbach minion and a resident of Castle Wulfenbach. -- that old bearded guy 19:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Exactly my comment with Dimitri Vapnoople. Corgi 21:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think we just need to define exactly what constitutes a "minion". Is it a question of loyalty, which seems to be the definition you're using, Corgi, or is it simply who a character works for?
- Personally I think the latter definition is more clear-cut, and especially works better since some characters' motives are still opaque. It's simple and verifiable to say who does and does not take orders from the Wulfenbach chain of command. Whether they want to doesn't necessarily factor in...
- except, perhaps, for characters who do as they're told as part of a cover for someone else, like Tiktoffen and, until Gil happened to him, Wooster. Should they count? -Acacia, as 72.73.129.148 01:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)